Developing - Monroe OC Harassment

[Tacitus42]

Yo Slappy

Man In Black did

 

[jbone]

The Monroe incident 911 caller has some comments posted in The Everett Herald editorial page (excerpt below). I think his arguments are specious for a supposed "2nd Amendment supporter".



Heraldnet.com article

"An officer called me back after my 911 call and told me this person was intentionally looking for confrontation to make a point about his constitutional right" That part in the article bugs me!

Call back to all the callers? Did the department feel some need to spread a particular message? It least the Herald article has it on the record encase any significance could be made of the departments statement regarding thier thoughts on the individual’s contacted.

 

[Dave_pro2a]

1. Israel uses our aid to buy our weapons, money comes back to us.

I can't argue with that logic. Oh wait, I can.

If I give you give dollars, and you use the five dollars to buy my Mc Combo Meal, then I have in fact just given you a Mc Combo Meal. I end up hungry, because you gave you my food, and the money I had to buy more food.

Who left holding the bag? Me, because I gave you 5 dollars, and then let you exchange if for my lunch.

Compare that to the US funding Israel. The American Tax payer might as well just send them free weapons. That's a stupid move for the US (and taxpayers) because we're putting the cost of those weapons on a credit card (national debt). BTW, Obama just asked that the US debt limit go up another 1.2 Trillion. http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/12/27/us-usa-treasury-debt-idUSTRE7BQ0KU20111227

And in return, they spy on us http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lawrence_Franklin_espionage_scandal That's gratitude for you. But to be fair, we spy on them too http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...ment-spied-on-Israels-Washington-embassy.html

 

[jbone]

Typical OCDO thread. Monroe to Israel in 14 days, and 64 posts.

 

[Metalhead47]

Typical OCDO thread. Monroe to Israel in 14 days, and 64 posts.

Lol.

Given the choice between Ron Paul & Nit Romrich, I really think I have to go with Paul this time around, much as I disagree with him. At this point I'm far more afraid of our own govt than any outside force. And the beauty of our Republic is, THE PRESIDENT DOES NOT SET FOREIGN POLICY ALONE. If nothing else, RP respects our Republic as the founders intended it to run, and would be bound by the will of congress, most of which has more realistic ideals on foreign policy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Schlepnier]

Ron has a few good ideas and some inane ones, the big key factor is he will never win a national race for president. a vote for Ron paul is a vote for Obama. and our country cannot survive another 4 years with a marxist socialist in the whitehouse....but i digress

Should we not leave the political debates for a general forum?

was there any other fallout from the monroe OC incident?

 

[John Hardin]

Sigh. Well, I guess I'll also put my shoulder to the bumper to help push this poor thread completely off-topic...

Statement from fmr. Ron Paul staffer
...
When pressed, he often times brings up conspiracy theories like ... WWII was just “blowback,” for Woodrow Wilson’s foreign policy errors, and such.

This, and his characterization of the 9/11 attacks as "our fault" for anything other than the unforgivable crime of not being Muslim.

Even though I was a RP delegate in 2008, I'm finding it more and more difficult, if not impossible, to support him any longer. While his domestic positions have been a breath of fresh air in an otherwise collectivist and anti-Constitutional Congress, his foreign policy views are dangerously naive. The only thing that redeems his opposition for support of Israel is that he also doesn't want to provide support for anybody else in the M.E.

This greatly saddens me.

 

[ManInBlack]

The only thing that redeems his opposition for support of Israel is that he also doesn't want to provide support for anybody else in the M.E.

This greatly saddens me.

Other than the tired canard of the Israelis being our "only ally in the Middle East" (despite them having been caught spying on us multiple times and having attacked one of our warships in the USS Liberty incident), what does our "Israel right or wrong" foreign policy gain for us? The fact of the matter is the only thing Israel produces or exports is trouble. If the Israelis want to keep land that was taken illegally from those who had lived on it for thousands of years, it should be their blood and treasure that is expended, not ours. We should stay the hell out. If we would simply confine our relations with foreign countries to mutually-beneficial trade, we would be far better for it. The only way a person could not realize this is if he were playing with less than a full deck, if he were a Muslim-hater, if he were blinded by a twisted and relatively-recent brand of Christianity, or if he, personally, had something to gain from the status quo.

 

[Metalhead47]

Other than the tired canard of the Israelis being our "only ally in the Middle East" (despite them having been caught spying on us multiple times and having attacked one of our warships in the USS Liberty incident), what does our "Israel right or wrong" foreign policy gain for us? The fact of the matter is the only thing Israel produces or exports is trouble. If the Israelis want to keep land that was taken illegally from those who had lived on it for thousands of years, it should be their blood and treasure that is expended, not ours. We should stay the hell out. If we would simply confine our relations with foreign countries to mutually-beneficial trade, we would be far better for it. The only way a person could not realize this is if he were playing with less than a full deck, if he were a Muslim-hater, if he were blinded by a twisted and relatively-recent brand of Christianity, or if he, personally, had something to gain from the status quo.

Actually, it was the Jews who were living on that land for thousands of years, and it was from them that it was "illegally" (by force) taken.

Let me put it in purely practical terms for you. The Israelis have nukes. How or why is irrelevant at this point. If left without our support, and surrounded by enemies... sooner or later they WILL use them. And that will have DIRE consequences for all of us over here, considering we get so much of the foundation of our economy from that region.

 

[Aknazer]

Other than the tired canard of the Israelis being our "only ally in the Middle East" (despite them having been caught spying on us multiple times and having attacked one of our warships in the USS Liberty incident), what does our "Israel right or wrong" foreign policy gain for us? The fact of the matter is the only thing Israel produces or exports is trouble. If the Israelis want to keep land that was taken illegally from those who had lived on it for thousands of years, it should be their blood and treasure that is expended, not ours. We should stay the hell out. If we would simply confine our relations with foreign countries to mutually-beneficial trade, we would be far better for it. The only way a person could not realize this is if he were playing with less than a full deck, if he were a Muslim-hater, if he were blinded by a twisted and relatively-recent brand of Christianity, or if he, personally, had something to gain from the status quo.

I'm sorry, but the Jews were there before the Muslims were as the Jewish religion is older than the Muslim religion. So one can easily say that the jews lived on the land for thousands of years before the Muslims. As for it being taken "illegally" well the muslims of the area supported the axis powers, and part of being on the losing end of the war was they lost some land. Thats how war goes. Same as the land that was gained in the 3-day war.

So if the lands given to the Jews after WWII was gained "illegally" then that means the land that the Muslims gained in previous wars was gained "illegally" and all of that land should be turned back over to whoever had control of it first. Or maybe the US should turn over all of it's land to the British since we gained our land from a war with the British. Seriously, saying the land was gained "illegally" is just ridiculous.

 

[Metalhead47]

I'm sorry, but the Jews were there before the Muslims were as the Jewish religion is older than the Muslim religion. So one can easily say that the jews lived on the land for thousands of years before the Muslims. As for it being taken "illegally" well the muslims of the area supported the axis powers, and part of being on the losing end of the war was they lost some land. Thats how war goes. Same as the land that was gained in the 3-day war.

So if the lands given to the Jews after WWII was gained "illegally" then that means the land that the Muslims gained in previous wars was gained "illegally" and all of that land should be turned back over to whoever had control of it first. Or maybe the US should turn over all of it's land to the British since we gained our land from a war with the British. Seriously, saying the land was gained "illegally" is just ridiculous.

Well said.

But perhaps we should ALL just let this drop before this crazy train goes any further off the rails...

 

[ManInBlack]

I'm sorry, but the Jews were there before the Muslims were as the Jewish religion is older than the Muslim religion. So one can easily say that the jews lived on the land for thousands of years before the Muslims. As for it being taken "illegally" well the muslims of the area supported the axis powers, and part of being on the losing end of the war was they lost some land. Thats how war goes. Same as the land that was gained in the 3-day war.

So if the lands given to the Jews after WWII was gained "illegally" then that means the land that the Muslims gained in previous wars was gained "illegally" and all of that land should be turned back over to whoever had control of it first. Or maybe the US should turn over all of it's land to the British since we gained our land from a war with the British. Seriously, saying the land was gained "illegally" is just ridiculous.

If the Muslims in the area supported the Axis powers, it was only because they detested their Allied colonial masters, the British. They were not party to the war, as they did not have their own nations to decide policy. Besides, Israel was founded in 1948, years after the war had ended.

If your argument is that the Jews have right to the land because a historical group they identify with resided there thousands of years ago, then surely you must support the repatriation of the entire Unite States to the Indians.

Ignorance, ignorance...

 

[Schlepnier]

The fact of the matter is the only thing Israel produces or exports is trouble. If the Israelis want to keep land that was taken illegally from those who had lived on it for thousands of years,

Seriously dude have you every picked up a history book ever?

thats the most inaccurate and inane thing i expect to here from groups like the muslim brotherhood.

I suggest you look into the land partition plan originally espoused at the behest of the UK through the league of nations and revisited by the UN within the confines of the balfour declaration. Israel exports nothing of the sort in fact if the arabs would leave israel alone there would be peace because israel reacts to the arab actions not instigates them.

Additioanlly nothing they have done in taking land during war has been illegal. winning wars and keeping land you have paid for in blood had been the way things have been done for centuries only america has gone down the path of returning land following WWII(we still hold a bunch of land we aquired during the spanish american war).

the original UN partion plan was a 2 state solution that the israelis accepted and the arabs rejected. i see no reason for a do-over especially given the unreasonable and unacceptable demands by arab groups(like the palestinian authorities in fatah or hamas)

for detailed information-
http://www.merip.org/palestine-israel_primer/intro-pal-isr-primer.html

 

[ManInBlack]

Seriously dude have you every picked up a history book ever?

thats the most inaccurate and inane thing i expect to here from groups like the muslim brotherhood.

I suggest you look into the land partition plan originally espoused at the behest of the UK through the league of nations and revisited by the UN within the confines of the balfour declaration. Israel exports nothing of the sort in fact if the arabs would leave israel alone there would be peace because israel reacts to the arab actions not instigates them.

Additioanlly nothing they have done in taking land during war has been illegal. winning wars and keeping land you have paid for in blood had been the way things have been done for centuries only america has gone down the path of returning land following WWII(we still hold a bunch of land we aquired during the spanish american war).

the original UN partion plan was a 2 state solution that the israelis accepted and the arabs rejected. i see no reason for a do-over especially given the unreasonable and unacceptable demands by arab groups(like the palestinian authorities in fatah or hamas)

for detailed information-
http://www.merip.org/palestine-israel_primer/intro-pal-isr-primer.html

Even if I accepted what I think is your premise, which I don't, why can Israel not stand on her own? I could care less who controls the land now; I was merely pointing out that importing a bunch of European Jews who could not trace their lineages back to Palestine to a territory populated for centuries by Arab Muslims was objectively wrong. It would be no different if American Indians occupied your home, because your land at one time "belonged" to them.

 

[Metalhead47]

Even if I accepted what I think is your premise, which I don't, why can Israel not stand on her own? I could care less who controls the land now; I was merely pointing out that importing a bunch of European Jews who could not trace their lineages back to Palestine to a territory populated for centuries by Arab Muslims was objectively wrong. It would be no different if American Indians occupied your home, because your land at one time "belonged" to them.

I believe I covered that a couple posts back. Unless of course you think 70s era fuel rationing and double digit gas priced are just the thing to throw on a recession...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[ManInBlack]

If you claim to be worried that Israeli use of nukes would hurt our economy, maybe we should be focusing our attention taking the nukes away from the only country in the Middle East that actually has them and has expressed hostile intent toward the United States by continuous spying and a direct military attack on one of our warships.

However, I know you don't sincerely believe the economy argument. If the U.S. found an alternative energy and stopped using petroleum products tomorrow, you would still advocate blind support of Israel. You are simply one of those types who doesn't know when to jump off a bandwagon even as it's rolling off a cliff.

 

[ManInBlack]

I think I'm going to print up a bunch of "Jonathan Pollard is my homeboy" tshirts. I bet I could make a killing off of those of you whose brains have been Hannityzed and Becked into mushy oatmeal.

 

[Metalhead47]

If you claim to be worried that Israeli use of nukes would hurt our economy, maybe we should be focusing our attention taking the nukes away from the only country in the Middle East that actually has them and has expressed hostile intent toward the United States by continuous spying and a direct military attack on one of our warships.

However, I know you don't sincerely believe the economy argument. If the U.S. found an alternative energy and stopped using petroleum products tomorrow, you would still advocate blind support of Israel. You are simply one of those types who doesn't know when to jump off a bandwagon even as it's rolling off a cliff.

What's with the personal attacks man? Snide accusations of ignorance... 'specially when you, me, Shlep, et al actually agree on 80 or 90% of stuff?

On one hand you say we should just mind our own business, then you go saying we should remove Israel's nukes... That's about as ironic as someone like you, who opposes govt intervention, taking as their screen name the epitome of non-transparent, non-accountable, unconstitutional govt interference hmmm...

Now I was trying to give you a practical argument on your own terms, re the global economic degustation that would result from the entire mid east suffering nuclear degustation, but yes you're quite right, I will continue to support Israel regardless, and for a great many reasons. The Jews actually have claim to a lot more land than they're on, but all they want is to be left alone with what they have. You of all people should be able to understand that.

In the end it's really very simple. If the Arabs laid down their arms, there would be no more violence. If the Jews laid down their arms, there would be no more Israel.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Aknazer]

If the Muslims in the area supported the Axis powers, it was only because they detested their Allied colonial masters, the British. They were not party to the war, as they did not have their own nations to decide policy. Besides, Israel was founded in 1948, years after the war had ended.

If your argument is that the Jews have right to the land because a historical group they identify with resided there thousands of years ago, then surely you must support the repatriation of the entire Unite States to the Indians.

Ignorance, ignorance...

I guess you should quit assuming things. The comment I made about how the Jews have a claim to the land over the Muslims due to being there first is only by using your arguement that the Muslims have a claim to the land and should be given it because it WAS their land for a few thousand years. I don't support repatriation of the land to the Muslims or the Jews (I support the Jews having the land as it was an agreement as part of the end of the war; but that's different than supporting it because of repatriation) and I don't support it to the Indians (hell they need to properly join the US and we need to quit giving them free money). Also the reason why the Muslims supported the Axis powers don't matter. The fact is that they supported them, they lost the war, and as a consequence they lost some of their land. And the fact that Israel was founded only three years after the war ended (maybe even less depending on the exact dates of the war ending vs the country being formalized) is very insignificant and could be due to the time it takes after the treaty was signed and all of the terms were formalized followed by the work to set up the new government. So quit acting like there was some major lapse in time from the end of the war to when Israel was founded.

And as stated a few posts back, this thread has gotten extremely off-topic.

 

[EirikBlodok]

WOW this thread got off topic quick